List Library files

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark this read-only and closed-world, and the description stays consistent while adding real context: result ordering, the truncated/limit interaction, the library_unavailable failure mode, and the API-key/auth requirement. That is meaningful disclosure beyond structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose and use cases, then parameters and edge behavior; nearly every clause carries information. It runs long as a single block, but no sentence is waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description supplies the return shape (files array with library_file_id, name, size_bytes, timestamps, latest_version, plus truncated) and ISO 8601 time formatting. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description goes further by explaining case-insensitive substring matching for query and what truncated means in relation to limit. The added value is modest but real.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"List the workbooks in the user's Library" gives a specific verb plus resource, and immediately scopes it (files this account owns, newest-updated first, everything save_to_library saved). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_sessions and save_to_library.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-use: "find a library_file_id to open with create_session, or to check that a save landed," naming the alternative tool it feeds. It also states exclusions (shared files and trash are left out), so an agent knows when results will be incomplete.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.